I just can't figure out how he does it time and time again. He must be psychic or something.
"How I Got The $84,000 Hepatitis C drug For $1500 By Buying It From India
How I got around one of the most obscene examples of Big Pharma overreach."
Just think about this. Americans are being charged $1000 PER PILL for this drug. That egregious overcharging today shows up in drug company revenue. The only way these companies will preserve their current valuations is if this "Big Pharma overreach" NEVER ENDS.
Given that citizens of all other countries pay MUCH LESS than Americans pay, there is a LOT of room for American drug prices to COME DOWN. And the people and politicians will increasingly be screaming for it to happen. And when it does, even a little bit, KABOOM. Revenues will implode.
"Oh, It's Not A Racket?
Oh yes it is.
'My parents were just vacationing in Europe (they go often so they're aware of how stuff works). My mom is diabetic and had a shortage of insulin while in France, they went to the drugstore and she showed the bottle of Humalog which is what she uses in the United States and the price in the United States is around $240 a bottle which is charged to her Medicare and insurance and can only be prescribed by her doctor.
The pharmacist recognized the bottle and without having to go to a doctor sold her a bottle of insulin for US $25.00.
This is the same brand made by Eli Lilly that she gets in the United States and why in the in the world that should be 1/10 of the price without having to go to the doctor for a prescription.'
Quoted with permission.
Note this well folks: No prescription needed and 1/10th the price for the exact same drug.
Fill your suitcase and bring same home with you and you'll go to prison.
Note that you're not counterfeiting anything, you're not adulterating anything and you lawfully own that which you're bringing into the country for the purpose of nothing other than making a profit.
If this sort of price-fixing, which is supposed to be a felony under 15 USC was to be stopped then the drug would cost $25/bottle -- or slightly more, since of course the person bringing it would like to make a profit -- here.
Even with a reasonable profit -- say, $5/bottle -- it would still collapse the price in the United States instantly."
Pharmaceutical drugs are going to become....much less popular.
Just like cigarettes, just like soda.
People used to think these things were fine, then they realized they were unhealthy, then they became unpopular and went into secular decline.
The U.S. is a pill-popping country. The market is saturated. Most middle-aged people have pill boxes to KEEP TRACK of all the prescription drugs they are taking. Pharmaceutical drugs are HOT. Everyone believes in them. For now. But there is nowhere to go but down.
Look at the loss of trust in authority. People hate Congress, they hate the banks, they hate the police. The voters in both parties are revolting against the party establishment. This energy is REAL. And the medical establishment will not be immune from this new revulsion of traditional authority.
People used to think of doctors as holy scientists, as trusted healers, as highly-trained sources of all knowledge. People don't trust their doctors anymore. They do their own research.
People don't trust corporations anymore either. They see them as corrupt profiteers. When a pharmaceutical company discovers a new "wonder drug," the response used to be excitement at the new "discovery." Now the response is an eye-roll, an assumption that the testing was faked, that the FDA and the CDC are captured regulators who put profits before people.
Look at the organic food movement. All the moms wanting to keep chemicals (and drugs) OUT of their children. These aren't hippies, these are upper class families. The upper classes were the first to stop smoking and the first to stop drinking soda. Then the new trends swept through the broader population.
Investors keep assuming these drug companies will not only retain their revenues and margins, but actually grow. On the contrary, the golden age for drug companies is already in the rear view mirror. Sales of pharmaceutical drugs are going to SHRINK. Investors haven't even STARTED to adjust. Beware.
Stephen A. Krahling and Joan A. Wlochowski. They’re former virologists at Merck. They’re insiders. They’ve leveled devastating charges against the company, which manufactures the MMR vaccine and sells it to the federal government.
In 2010, the whistleblowers filed a suit against Merck. The suit drags on in court (“UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al. v. MERCK & CO.,” Case No. 2:10-cv-04374-CDJ).
The Huffington Post reports on the charges in the suit (“Merck Has Some Explaining To Do Over Its MMR Vaccine Claims,” 9/24/2014, updated: 11/27/2014):
“…former Merck scientists [claim] that Merck ‘fraudulently misled the government and omitted, concealed, and adulterated material information regarding the efficacy of its mumps vaccine in violation of the FCA [False Claims Act].’”
“According to the whistleblowers’ court documents, Merck’s misconduct was far-ranging: It ‘failed to disclose that its mumps vaccine was not as effective as Merck represented, (ii) used improper testing techniques, (iii) manipulated testing methodology, (iv) abandoned undesirable test results, (v) falsified test data, (vi) failed to adequately investigate and report the diminished efficacy of its mumps vaccine, (vii) falsely verified that each manufacturing lot of mumps vaccine would be as effective as identified in the labeling, (viii) falsely certified the accuracy of applications filed with the FDA, (ix) falsely certified compliance with the terms of the CDC purchase [of the MMR vaccine] contract, (x) engaged in the fraud and concealment described herein for the purpose of illegally monopolizing the U.S. market for mumps vaccine, (xi) mislabeled, misbranded, and falsely certified its mumps vaccine, and (xii) engaged in the other acts described herein to conceal the diminished efficacy of the vaccine the government was purchasing.’”
A landmark study out of John Hopkins. It was published on July 26, 2000, in the Journal of the American Medical Association: “Is US health really the best in the world?” The author was Dr. Barbara Starfield, a revered public health expert.
Starfield, in her study, separated deaths from errors/mistreatment in hospitals, and deaths from medical drugs:
* Yearly deaths from mistreatment and errors in hospitals: 119,000.
* YEARLY DEATHS FROM CORRECTLY PRESCRIBED MEDICAL DRUGS: 106,000.
Pharmaceutical drugs are the new asbestos. Get ready.
I think they might be looking at ACAD....recently approved drug, Nuplazid for Parkinson's Disease Psychosis (PDP). First in it's class, one of a kind and Acadia has the World Wide Rights. Adios.
Does anyone have any information about the Propecia lawsuits? I have heard that these may actually be moving forward, and that there may be some action this year or next. Thanks in advance for anything you can provide.
New research out. Check out the story.
The consensus that big pharma and big medicine are miracles is starting to crack. No matter what the paid-off doctors recommend, the amount of prescriptions people take is about to start declining. People are going to stop believing.
According to the research, engaging with the Medical Establishment is more likely to kill you than almost anything else! 9.8% of all annual deaths are caused by medical error!
Yes, rje437. And it is right and good that U.S. citizens should pay 4X more than all other countries to help poor little Merck with the cost of research. U.S. voters LOVE that and think it's TOTALLY fair. LOL.
All the rich Europeans get to pay much less for Merck products than U.S. citizens. The hoity toity Brits, the fancy pants Swiss, the snobby French, the BMW and Mercedes driving Germans. They all pay less and U.S.. citizens pay much much more.
Historically, politicians have thrown U.S. citizens under the bus to help Merck. It looks like that's likely to change. If it does change, even a little bit, Merck is in serious trouble.
But hey, if you can convince the voters to pick Jeb Bush or Barack Obama, maybe things can continue as they are a little longer. But if they pick Clinton, Sanders, or Trump, drug prices will stop increasing and start falling.
This pandering fool does not understand the cost of research that goes into the price of a drug. Setting up a straw dog then knocking it over is her phony modus operandi.
So Trump for president.
Hurry up fellas, boat load up now, then truck load up tomorrow morning with all the MERCK shares you can possibly afford to buy. Then buy even more, for SUPER REWARDS and BIG BIG GAINS. MERCK will clearly and obviously be the HUGE HUGE MAY WINNER and June and 2016 too !!
After shaking the pharmaceutical industry earlier this year with a tweet, Hillary Clinton is back on the drug-price warpath. Her comments at a New Hampshire town hall on Tuesday should worry conventional drug makers.
Clinton criticized a system in which a miraculous cure for Hepatitis C (HCV) can be cheap in Egypt but unaffordable in some U.S. states. The market reaction has been muted, especially compared to the swoon Clinton induced back in September. The Nasdaq Biotech Index, which fell 4.4 percent on the day of Clinton's fateful tweet, was down less than 1 percent on Wednesday. That reaction may turn out to be too mild.
"A company came up with a great, lifesaving, curative drug and they're willing to sell it at a really cheap price nearly anywhere else but here," Clinton said. "We can't let that go on.”
Clinton's declaration that this pricing disparity can't go on, while predictably populist given the circumstances, is potentially loaded. Right now, her plan to curb drug prices includes lower caps on out-of-pocket costs, programs to import drugs from abroad, and enabling Medicare to negotiate with drugmakers.
This would bring Clinton closer to her position in the 1990s, when she pushed for cost to be a part of FDA decisions on approving drugs.
Clinton's comments could revive a fear that spooked investors in the fall -- that she would campaign partly on drug pricing and, if elected, make a priority of policies the industry has been fighting for years.
But there is a growing wave of public outrage at drug pricing.
the fact that Clinton is looking at cracking some harder nuts should be a concern for the whole industry.